Healing Gaia

India's Daughters and Canada's Daughters

The gang-rape and murder of Jyoti Singh has provoked global outrage over the failure of police and judicial systems to protect women and ensure their human rights.

By Doreen Nicoll
Published March 11, 2015

On Sunday I watched the CBC documentary India's Daughter. It was disturbing, heartbreaking and infuriating all at the same time.

Twenty-three year old Jyoti Singh went to a movie with a male friend. At 8:33 PM, they boarded a private bus to return home. During that twenty-minute ride, Jyoti was gang-raped and dumped at the side of a highway. 15 days later, Jyoti died from her injuries.

The following day I had the pleasure of attending an International Women's Day luncheon where Aruna Papp, Canada's foremost expert on honour based violence, was the keynote speaker. Both Aruna and the documentary made it clear that despite a growing educated middle class, India is still a patriarchal paradise.

Aruna used the phrase, "modernization, not westernization." Essentially, this means that men want the benefit of financial progress and independence without any advancements in women's rights. Regardless of their status, education or economic independence, women will still be considered chattel, less than men, without human rights.

From the documentary it's clear that this view is held by educated as well as uneducated men. I was horrified when one of the defense lawyers for the rapists stated matter-of-factly:

If my daughter or sister engaged in pre-marital activities and disgraced herself and allowed herself to lose face and character by doing such things, I would most certainly take this sort of sister or daughter to my farmhouse, and in front of my entire family, I would put petrol on her and set her alight."

So, seeing a movie with a man who is not a relative and being out at night was cause enough to rape Jyoti in order to teach her to change her western ways. Killing her simply sent a stronger message to all women: don't try to raise yourself above your station in life.

In India a woman is raped every twenty minutes. Since the rape and murder of Jyoti, reported rapes have increased 35 percent. But the police, judicial system and national government are failing to protect women and ensure their basic human rights.

In Canada, one in three women will be sexually assaulted. Only six percent of assaults are reported to police. Even fewer go to trial.

According to the Native Women's Association of Canada, Aboriginal women experience violence at a rate three and a half times greater than non-Aboriginal women. In fact, young Aboriginal women are five times more likely to die of violence than Canadian women of the same age.

We too have a culture of rape rooted in systemic violence against women. In the case of Aboriginal women, this rape culture is compounded by racism.

In March, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) released a scathing report admonishing Canada's Stephen Harper government for ignoring calls for a National Public Inquiry independent of political process into our missing and murdered Aboriginal girls and women.

The report also called for a National Action Plan that would address the root causes of violence against Aboriginal women as well as the failure of our police and justice system to protect Aboriginal women from violence.

The report stated that money and people must be made available to implement the recommendations arising from the plan, as well as to monitor, evaluate and implement changes as required.

Once again, the fate of marginalized women lies in the hands of patriarchal institutions - namely, the police, the justice system and the Harper government.

It's time to let the Harper government know that Canadians will no longer tolerate the federal government intentionally disregarding the basic human rights of Canada's Aboriginal women and girls.

A debate between the leaders of the federal parties dedicated to women's issues would be perfect forum in which to discuss our appalling treatment of Aboriginal women.

Green Party leader Elizabeth May and NDP leader Thomas Muclair are ready to discuss issues unique to women, but we need the other parties to be at their podiums as well.

Please go to http://chn.ge/1BDDaDh and sign the Up for Debate petition encouraging the Bloc Quebecois, Liberals and PC to join this important discussion.

Doreen Nicoll is a feminist and a member of several community organizations working diligently to end poverty, hunger and gendered violence.

4 Comments

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Read Comments

[ - ]

By DavidE.H.Smith (registered) | Posted March 13, 2015 at 00:12:45

More POLITICAL INTERFERENCE of RCMP Investigations 'kills' Female Aboriginal Advocates, RCMP officers' morale & DE-RAILS & Controls 'INQUIRIES'/Commissions.

Do Native Women, et al, Have the Right to Freedom of Fear of Retribution; "DISAPPEARED" & "SUICIDE-D" Activists along "DEATH-POTS" Highway (#16)?

Native Women, et al, Expectations of Freedom from Fear of Retribution in Due Diligence Info SHARING & Consultations; Deliberate,'Illegal', &/or, Unethical DEPRIVATION of INFO Re; 'Domestic' & Foreign Treaties Basis for Suing Corp.Can. & its Global Assocs. Corporate Assocs. to Sue Corp.Can. for Fraud While Reopening Both Treaties to Guarantee Provisions of The WAD Accord & Transparent Negotiations to Access Natural Resources?

HUMAN NATURE; How Cultures & Traditions can be used to explain Corruption, Info Deprivation & Bullying to Protect the Power of 'Death-Pots'.

Does CORPORATE CANADA Prefer Limelight on 'Race' not Shareholders' Dividends versus harmless NON shareholders, both; Native & non Native? CorpCan's 'FOREIGN' ASSOCIATES, TERRIFIED if Native Male Political Leaders Implicated in 'Disappearing' Native Women's Advocates.

After reading about the fears of retaliation of the Native Canadian women at the Special House of Commons Committee on Violence Against Indigenous Women, by powerful chiefs & councils for questioning & improving the chiefs/councils plans & decisions, etc., it has been suggested that it might be easier to minimize any potential for negative 'stereo typing' of Native chiefs & their councils by: 1) the most vulnerable Native community members (95% - 99% of the members of Native communities), 2) non Native funders of Native communities & 3) et al, by pointing out once again, but, with greater emphasis, that the most vulnerable community members, both; Native & non Native, are slowly & painfully becoming aware of the threat that is posed to the bullying, information depriving despots (Death-Pots) by way of the sharing of the relevant information, in forums that have eliminated the fear of retaliation.

And, therefore, in regard to the recent, June 5, 2014, comments by the grand chief of the Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians Gordon Peters about negative 'stereotypes', it has also been suggested that Mr. Peters needn't be concerned as Native & non Native Canadians have made: 1) the distinctions between the bullying despots & the most vulnerable community members & 2) the distinctions between those chiefs & councils that want/need their community members to start getting the relevant information, including the information & questions in The WAD Accord & its Compensation and those chiefs & councils who need to keep their community members in the dark in order to supplicate the most 'vulnerables' to limited beliefs & 'hopes' and thereby, maintain, &/or, enhance their abusive powers.

Perhaps, Mr. Peters can take some solace in knowing that he may be able to learn more about which bullying, information depriving despots are presently being 'de-stereotyped'.

Some of the chiefs & councils may even graciously admit that some of the more abusive aspects of human nature are being used & rationalized by despots by claims that the abuse of their power is based upon tradition, &/or, culture that excludes the comprehension of the abuses by non Natives. Doesn't this suggest that unless you are in the position of being able to be bullied, etc., then you are incapable of, &/or, should be prohibited from helping those who are being bullied by providing the information & safe forums for the discussion, sharing, improving information, plans, etc. before they become a decision that are acted upon & the human costs are added up? There are many examples of this 'helping' precedent in other human communities around the globe.

The potential sponsors of this 'helping process' understand the importance of identifying, investigating, prosecuting & enforcing the prevention of the abusers from continuing their abuse. Similarly, the potential sponsors can assist the most vulnerable community members to ascertain the amount of compensation they are due for previous abuse. These sponsors who are being considered have also observed & understand that the political abuse of the RCMP is causing a great deal of morale problems within the non union service (see; Paul Palango; 'Dispersing the Fog'). Therefore, it is for the aforementioned reasons that the potential sponsors would like to be considered to help the most vulnerable community members eliminate their fears & help the most vulnerable develop the natural resources that are accessed by way of the community's lands. These are also the lands that have already been secretly 'negotiated', &/or, are in the process of being secretly 'negotiated' within Canada by way of the despots & without the full due diligence sharing of the information with the most vulnerable community members.

There are several reasons why some of these foreign corporate sponsors might be considered. They are: 1) basically, to understand & perhaps prevent bullying despots from making secret arrangements whereby, in exchange for: a) the despots' cooperation to endorse the last minute 'new' &'improved' environmental & safety standards, etc. for their projects that may be derived from the C – CI Treaty, the EU – Canada CET Agreement, the TP Partnership, et al & b) the 'protection' provided by the bullies for the potential foreign participants/ investors from the most vulnerable community members,

the potential foreign participants/investors may exclusively & secretly reward the bullies financially & thereby, further legitimize the bullies power & control by way the bullies' mechanisms of fear.

2) some of the potential foreign participants are as disgusted with the 'unethical' & 'inhumane' arrangements of corporate Canada & their representatives in the government of Canada as many Native & non Native Canadians, et al, are. One potential participant said:

'It's not that we are racist when it comes to dealing with Canadians, it's just that we can't stand the way that you suck up to us'.

That is to say; while corporate Canada & its political representatives 'suck up' to the 'coveted' foreign investor, the 'Canadians' also 'shi...', uh, “purge down”. It may be regrettable that this bullying is just part of human nature?

Isn't our job to identify & to minimize, &/or, eliminate it.

Therefore, while the most vulnerable Native community members may be looking for a much 'better' deal that protects their rights to live & express themselves in the absence of fear, isn't it reasonable to assume that they can also expect to start getting the aforementioned relevant information for their humble consideration, including The Compensation that is embodied in The W.A.D. Accord?

So, does the 'much better deal' by way of these 'foreign' countries include: 1) the elimination of the bullying by the information depriving despots, & 2) enabling the employment opportunities that can equal those non Native Canadians & then use the “better deal” to shrink the financial disparity between: the 95% - 99% of the communities' most vulnerable members & the 1% - 5% of the existing political & financial bullies, both; Native & non Native? & 3) et al.

But, aren't the above reasons why The W.A.D. Accord (aka; The Australian Question) was developed in the first place? That is to say, The Accord was developed in order to ensure that the most vulnerable community members are getting the relevant information & are getting the opportunity to consider, to discuss, to ask questions about it, to improve, to create alternatives, to reject, etc., the information & questions in The Accord, including The Compensation that is embodied in it?

By way of closing, now that Mr. Peters' concerns about negative stereotyping have been laid to rest, the most vulnerable community members, et al, might also consider some of the other areas of information that they are continuing to be deprived of that can be, &/or, are being abused by the the aforementioned bullies in order to strengthen their, the bullies', 'legitimacy' besides: 1) the on going land settlements & treaty rights negotiations, 2) the development of Aboriginal self-governance & 3) et al?

And, finally, how do you, the readers in North America, China, the European Union, the Trans Pacific nations, et al, think that these human nature issues can be redressed by The WAD Accord?

I look forward to reading about your questions, your comments, your improvements, etc., regarding the above & the information listed below.

Sincerely,

David E.H. Smith - Researcher - “Qui tam..."


Also see; "HELP IS ON THE WAY; UN's Mr. Anaya, et al."


Please consider sharing the enclosed information & questions with 10 friends who will share it with 10 others & so on...


To SHARE Information & Questions re; The Relationship between Human (Nature) Rights & Economics in 1) the C-CI Treaty, the CET Agreement, TPP, et al, and 2) Native Canadian Treaties via The WAD Accord & to access the List of RECENT ARTICLES, LETTERS & NOTIFICATIONS by DEHS. see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By ananthsrivastav (registered) | Posted March 13, 2015 at 12:44:36

I do not think the film said anything untrue. But its focus is on "exposing" a supposedly majority Indian male worldview. It pulls in statements from the criminals, their lawyers who themselves appear to be fringe elements- it was pretty difficult to find lawyers to argue on their behalf to start with, forensic psychiatrists explaining the criminal mind, a person who runs a protective home for juveniles- who is duty bound to explain the background of street children and a ex-chief minister who is desperate to redeem herself of past statements about the incident. The friend and tutor of the girl himself would undergone psychological trauma. These statements are then extrapolated and generalized to "most' males of Indian origin.

Serial rapes and violent attacks on women are happening everyday in the best of cities, we do not see these criminals getting prime time on TV. Do we see terrorists and their doctrinaires and murderers and rapists in Europe and the US getting 'pulpit' time on Western TV? Did the Norwegian who killed 60 teenagers get a documentary where he gets to espouse his "thoughts"? Nazism, racism, religious bigotry, xenophobia is plenty beneath the surface of European society- that does not mean that we put the bigots and their defendants on TV and beam their opinions across the planet.

Udwin says she has not seen a similar reaction anywhere else in the world to rape where a spontaneous outburst happened across the country. But film does not focus how all of society thousands upon thousands of men came out on the street to protest. Most of these men and women have grown up in traditional homes with conservative ideas about family and the role of women- but that did not mean they were not sickened by evil or repulsed by forcible sex. To equate patriarchal societies and conservative thinking with an attitude that violence towards women is acceptable is like saying that women with a career do not care about family life, or having PG rated films encourage bad social behavior. The vast majority of conservative traditional and uneducated men even in the most rural of locations are first human beings then fathers, brothers and sons who are caring towards women and children.

Do we need a change in attitudes in India? Sure we do! But do not make the case that most men find rape acceptable, I have lived and worked in rural India for years and in its biggest cities and know that this is false. We do need a change in how we view marriage and dating, before we have men and women who understand each other and are comfortable with each other.

Do I think that the world is out to malign India- no I do not. But the rest of the world seeks to sweep its dirt under the carpet. The statistics quoted by the film that a woman is raped every 22 min in India is juxtaposed to a Western figure when reduced is a rape every 9 minutes in Europe.

Comment edited by ananthsrivastav on 2015-03-13 12:45:08

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By LOL_all_over_again (registered) | Posted March 17, 2015 at 10:45:23

Comments with a score below -5 are hidden by default.

You can change or disable this comment score threshold by registering an RTH user account.

Permalink | Context

By LOL@LOL (anonymous) | Posted March 18, 2015 at 09:10:24 in reply to Comment 110273

The irony is delicious.

Permalink | Context

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to comment.

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds